This not-too-subtle story on how Peter effected the deaths of Aninias and his wife is a blight on the Christian story.
It conveys nothing of the spirit of Christianity, and has everything to do with intolerance and display of a lack of faith in fear of the future by those who should have known better.
From a practical point of view it is also unjustified. Since we modern Christians can now look on in retrospect and realize the importance of future planning for retirement, we can see that for this couple at least who had what we would consider, forethought, that was not an option, and those who should have known better were nowhere around to place an argument in their behalf.. Especially in the days where the Romans can confiscate everything and murder the family with impunity. Future planning is important today, imagine how important it was back then.
One argument is that it wasn't Peter but the Holy Spirit that caused these deaths. That doesn't fit if we understand the character of a merciful God, and One who instills over and over again through His son's ministry that everyone should concern himself with today's problems, and have faith in what God provides for tomorrow, and one who would understand then the future advantages of financial preparation for retirement. In this sentence, we can assume then that all financial planners of the future deserve death, all factors remaining equal.
Secondly, the typical Jewish wife would have had little to say in the financial affairs of her husband, therefore, if we can assign some culpability to him, and that is in question, at least by default of the level of influence that her position provided, she deserved somewhat of lesser sentence than her husband.
Peter could have looked aside the fact that they had extra money, and said to himself "I will have faith, and since Christ founded the Church, then nothing can ensure it's downfall, not even money. I will be content in charity with what is offered, and be merciful as a gesture and recognition of this new Church."
What better lesson to new converts to a new religion than to set this up has a prime example of conduct expected of everyone, but allas the temptation was too great, the resistance to testing out new powers was much too great. The lesson learned prior that a man is to offer his cloak as well, is put aside, and he can indeed murder the thief. Instead of pleading for the lives of this couple in front of the Holy Spirit has Abraham did for the people of Sodom, we have a new Apostle sacrificing these people who haven't even had the advantage of a proper indoctrination into the fold. He must have thought "Who cares how we gain their membership, terror is just as good as reasonable persuasion".
My feeling is that this is a lesson on how not to do things to obtain converts. After this scene, one could hear a pin drop has nervous agreement is now done for any request asked for by Peter. They would realize that now they have a new don in the organization , one that tolerates little and is reactive and prone to extremes. The cheers would go up on this great victory of force has everyone would discuss how they finally got rid of these horrible unwanted people in their midst. The party must have been wonderful.
It is hard for me to say how I would react back then. I would cautiously walk backwards toward the door hoping no one notices. It would cause me to review Christ's teaching and reflect on those days when I was on the Mount and heard all the wonderful encompassing words of love. I would be very cautious around this man. I would measure my every words. I would never disagree, and smile and do exactly as I am told at will, my sense of self preservation kicking in. I would seek to distance myself from him. I would only change until I heard his own thoughts on it, otherwise I would assume he is comfortable in this new found power and cares not what anyone thinks. It would seem I would wait a long time has he felt he owes no one an explaination due to the lack of evidence today.
Scripture says nothing on the after effects of this, but I assume membership must have suffered for a time, has the terrorized reconsolidate.
AndyF
It conveys nothing of the spirit of Christianity, and has everything to do with intolerance and display of a lack of faith in fear of the future by those who should have known better.
From a practical point of view it is also unjustified. Since we modern Christians can now look on in retrospect and realize the importance of future planning for retirement, we can see that for this couple at least who had what we would consider, forethought, that was not an option, and those who should have known better were nowhere around to place an argument in their behalf.. Especially in the days where the Romans can confiscate everything and murder the family with impunity. Future planning is important today, imagine how important it was back then.
One argument is that it wasn't Peter but the Holy Spirit that caused these deaths. That doesn't fit if we understand the character of a merciful God, and One who instills over and over again through His son's ministry that everyone should concern himself with today's problems, and have faith in what God provides for tomorrow, and one who would understand then the future advantages of financial preparation for retirement. In this sentence, we can assume then that all financial planners of the future deserve death, all factors remaining equal.
Secondly, the typical Jewish wife would have had little to say in the financial affairs of her husband, therefore, if we can assign some culpability to him, and that is in question, at least by default of the level of influence that her position provided, she deserved somewhat of lesser sentence than her husband.
Peter could have looked aside the fact that they had extra money, and said to himself "I will have faith, and since Christ founded the Church, then nothing can ensure it's downfall, not even money. I will be content in charity with what is offered, and be merciful as a gesture and recognition of this new Church."
What better lesson to new converts to a new religion than to set this up has a prime example of conduct expected of everyone, but allas the temptation was too great, the resistance to testing out new powers was much too great. The lesson learned prior that a man is to offer his cloak as well, is put aside, and he can indeed murder the thief. Instead of pleading for the lives of this couple in front of the Holy Spirit has Abraham did for the people of Sodom, we have a new Apostle sacrificing these people who haven't even had the advantage of a proper indoctrination into the fold. He must have thought "Who cares how we gain their membership, terror is just as good as reasonable persuasion".
My feeling is that this is a lesson on how not to do things to obtain converts. After this scene, one could hear a pin drop has nervous agreement is now done for any request asked for by Peter. They would realize that now they have a new don in the organization , one that tolerates little and is reactive and prone to extremes. The cheers would go up on this great victory of force has everyone would discuss how they finally got rid of these horrible unwanted people in their midst. The party must have been wonderful.
It is hard for me to say how I would react back then. I would cautiously walk backwards toward the door hoping no one notices. It would cause me to review Christ's teaching and reflect on those days when I was on the Mount and heard all the wonderful encompassing words of love. I would be very cautious around this man. I would measure my every words. I would never disagree, and smile and do exactly as I am told at will, my sense of self preservation kicking in. I would seek to distance myself from him. I would only change until I heard his own thoughts on it, otherwise I would assume he is comfortable in this new found power and cares not what anyone thinks. It would seem I would wait a long time has he felt he owes no one an explaination due to the lack of evidence today.
Scripture says nothing on the after effects of this, but I assume membership must have suffered for a time, has the terrorized reconsolidate.
AndyF